Talk:Zakaria Botros

Under construction

I really don't know what I'm doing, but I do know a page needs to exist for this man. He is definitely of note. If I could read Arabic, I would use that page to make a good English page. - Pop6 (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

ok. You above there who started this, you probably know more than I do because this is my first time to put anything on wiki. People out there please forgive me if I mess something up. I speak some arabic so I will take a look and see what I can do to expand on this. Also im curious about the $5 million dollar fatwa, theres no reference on it. I would like to see the documentation.

References

Original source in article

Link should be checked. Appears to be "dead." Leads to a message that access is "forbidden." 85.241.150.91 (talk) 12:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)RonCam

The information stating the video "Innocence of Muslims" sparked the debates in Benghazi is false. It has been confirmed it was a planned attack and the video had nothing to do with it ( http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/10/state_department_says_innocence_of_muslims_didn_t_prompt_benghazi_attack.html ). 2/20/2013 5:54am EST. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.95.160 (talk) 09:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

More sources

Here are some more sources. Some are more helpful than others.

http://www.fatherzakaria.net/

http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%B2%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A7_%D8%A8%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%B3

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles8/Ibrahim-Islams-Public-Enemy-Number-One.php

http://www.islam-christianity.net/

http://parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20080507049

http://www.answersaboutfaith.com/english/audio/father_zakaria_botros/questions_about_faith.htm

- Pop6 (talk) 16:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

boutros

Would someone be able to make Zakaria Boutros go to this site? Pop6 (talk) 23:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality of this article

This article is about a person who criticizes Islam, we find information about him and about his criticism to Islam, but we don't find any information about responses to his criticism from Muslim figures. This is a one-sided article it needs to be balanced by the Islamic opinion. Yamanam (talk) 10:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

We cannot find responses to his criticisms can be because there are no answers to his questions and this is also what Zakaria Botros claims.

<rant>There is no explanation of any analysis of anything that this man has said. There are broad sweeping statements about the general context, and a vague summary of some generalized reactions in the form of a fatwa. As an educated person with an intimate understanding of islam I gained nothing from this wiki except "he made some muslims mad and they want to kill him". Any informed person knows that muslims are generally the most moderate when it comes to criticism, if it is serious and lacks insult. Islam has historically been the most contemplated, scientific, discussed, debated, revised, and permeable religion out of the 3 Aberhamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). This is why the source of most of human science (algebra, algorithms, astronomy, chemistry, geology, climatology, biology/anatomy, cryptography, trignometry, fractile mathematics, binary mathematics, boolean algebra, descrete mathematics, etc etc), technology (yay alcohol), and philosophy have been muslim scholars, while scholars from other religions would avoid taboos or keep their knowledge secret (especially in philosophy... Al Ghazali was the unattributed source for many modern philosophical schools of thought, especially anything that stems from Cartesian, and that's just one guy). That said, Islam has historically also been the most resistant and reactionary to some of the core Islamic taboos. These taboos are insulting the prophet, the book, or the lord, advertising blasphemous views to muslims with the intent of shaking their faith by non-muslims, converting from Islam to another faith and advertising it, and threatening a muslim with violence or force, etc. Nothing suggested in this article even touches why this man would have a 60 million dollar bounty on his head. He is a convert and he is advertising anti islamic rhetoric to muslims and suggesting that they convert to Christianity, but that wouldnt make the bounty on his head an order of magnitude larger than some other high profile targets that have seemingly done much worse than what this article mentions in the view of muslim extremists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie this guy just got bumped up to 3.3 million dollars, a little more than 1/20th of this new guy few people know about). Ergo I conclude that this article does nothing but spread fear and hate without context or information, and does not help the intellectual discourse it is meant to facilitate. I would like for someone with more time and patience than I to update it without bias for all of us to learn. If we have an understanding to the strong, violent, and high value response to this man, it would teach us more about the politics and sociology behind a group like the Taliban (who does not exactly have a lot of spare time and resources right now) putting such a large bounty out for him. (note: please don't dispute anything I said above about islam unless you have at least 1 PHD, are fluent in at least 3 languages, and have read primary sources in their original languages in a scholarly or academic setting. It would also have nothing to do with the article we are trying to fix. if it did, i would have references). </rant>

This claim should have a reference from a reputable source. It may be correct, but it should have a reference. Jacob F. Roecker (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 14:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC).

Tags

I added the cleanup tag because this article reads like it was written by a foreigner, i.e. not a fluent English speaker. Also, I added the POV tag because it talks very little about his work and a lot about criticism. NYyankees51 (talk) 15:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I have made an effort to clean this article up with regard to grammar, spelling, and style elements that made it seem like it was written by a non-native English speaker. Lunarmovements (talk) 18:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

References for the Debates section

I have grave doubts about the references for the "Debates" section of this article which are labeled 12, 13, and 14. Number 12 leads simply to a site where one can buy a book. Number 13 is a dead link. And when one clicks on number 14, it downloads an HTML page onto your computer. I did not open the downloaded page because I was not familiar with the source and had no idea what the content might be. Surely readers should not have to make judgement calls about the safety involved in checking out references for Wikipedia articles?

I believe all three references should be removed and at least one appropriate reference should then be provided for this section. Lunarmovements (talk) 18:31, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Additional sources

While other wikis should not be cited as reliable sources, editors may want to read http://orthodoxwiki.org/Zakaria_Botros before making changes to this article. See also these searches: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the respect

Dear readers Zekeria batros a priest of christ.His interpretations regarding Quran and prophet Muhammed have personality with bias.The manipulation of one character without changing of main content unimportant issue. The main paradox is he belief to gospels with substantial contradictions from the birth (Matta and luke BC and AC near six years) to death of Jesus (In a one Gospel Eli Eli lema sevakteni? in another Gospel contradicts to this). You could easily examine the gospel's citations of Jesus and disiples from holy bible -old testament- which were falsely transported and incompetable. The importance of changing in one word in Quran make Gospels unimportant and ignorant books.we well known that the completed Gospel text was John's Gospel is documented 200 year AC. With my best regards.

False Information and Evangelical Propaganda

First, the story of "60 Million bounty" on Zakaria'a head is mere fiction, and probably invented by Zakaria himself

the story was propagated by Pat Robertson, who showed a report making the claim and taking this kind of "news" from an Egyptian Newspaper....the Irony lies at the report itself, sine the newspaper in Arabic say "Zakaria receives 600,000 for his Evangelist activities"....but then, someway, somehow, the 600,000 magically became "60 Millions", and Zakaria's Salary also magically turned into a "Al-Qaeda's bounty on his head"

Second, Ahmad Al-Qat'ani in the Al-Jazeera interview never said "Six Millions leave Islam annually", but rather said that "Six Millions converted to Christianity between 1947 and 2000"....but if we take the info presented in the article as true, then Pakistan's Christian population would be bigger than Pakistan's whole population in total today....which is complete nonsense

Third, this article appears to be written by a Pro-Zakaria writer, since it mentions only the "Goodies" but doesn't mention how he got expelled from Coptic ministries around the world because of his engaement in Child Molestation

I hope that anyone will take these points as a matter of concern and try to Re-Write the article with Valid and True information, just so we don't give anybody a chance to doubt Wikipedia's Credibility

Omar amross (talk) 21:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

• The LAT source given states "He has not been linked to 'Innocence of Muslims,' but the three disparate figures who have emerged as key forces behind the movie are all devotees of his views." Thus not directly connected with the living person. Collect (talk) 13:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Zakaria Botros. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120402144709/http://jesus-for-all.com/father_zakaria/3amr_adeeb_khaled_gendee_attacking_fz.wmv to http://jesus-for-all.com/father_zakaria/3amr_adeeb_khaled_gendee_attacking_fz.wmv

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC)